CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ11295277
Regular
Mar 30, 2020

MARIA PARTIDA vs. ST. JOHN KNITS, INC., THE HARTFORD

The WCAB granted reconsideration to further review the exclusion of QME Dr. Amory's reports. Defendant argues applicant failed to prove injury arising out of and in the course of employment and that the exclusion of Dr. Amory's reports was an error. The Board will rescind the prior order and return the matter for further proceedings, specifically focusing on whether defense counsel violated Labor Code Section 4062.3 regarding communication with the QME and service of sub rosa DVD. The Board directs the WCJ to analyze these issues consistent with the precedent set in *Suon v. California Dairies*.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationFindings of Fact and OrderQualified Medical EvaluatorEx Parte CommunicationLabor Code Section 4062.3Sub Rosa DVDSubstantial Medical EvidenceArising Out of and in the Course of EmploymentAdmissibility of Evidence
References
Case No. ADJ3995122 (OAK 0343980)
Regular
Aug 13, 2013

ROSA GOMEZ vs. NOB HILL FOODS, YORK INSURANCE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted removal to address the exclusion of sub rosa films and investigator testimony. The trial judge had excluded this evidence because it was disclosed late and not shown to treating doctors. However, the Board found that the defendant properly disclosed the evidence and investigators at the mandatory settlement conference per Labor Code § 5502(d)(3). The admissibility of the sub rosa films and investigator testimony is now deferred to the trial judge.

Sub rosa filmsremovalmandatory settlement conferencedisclosureevidence exclusioninvestigative reportsLabor Code section 5502petition for removalpetition for reconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
Case No. ADJ1479326 (ANA 0411799) ADJ7233578
Regular
Oct 07, 2014

JONATHAN DUONG vs. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board overturned a WCJ's decision to exclude sub rosa surveillance video. The Board found no legal basis for excluding the video obtained in a mobile home park parking lot and a grocery store, as the applicant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in those public areas. The Board determined that the defendant would suffer significant prejudice from the exclusion, justifying removal of the case. Therefore, the sub rosa video was ruled admissible and may be provided to medical evaluators.

Sub rosa videoremovalreconsiderationadmissibilityinvasion of privacyreasonable expectation of privacycivil liabilityworkers' compensation fraudmedical-legal evaluatorworkers' compensation appeals board
References
Case No. ADJ4707980 (VNO 0543260) ADJ3907003 (VNO 0543258) ADJ7500629
Regular
Apr 05, 2012

RAMON SALAZAR vs. CONSOLIDATED DISPOSAL SERVICE, ACE USA Administered By CANNON COCHRAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC.

The Appeals Board granted removal, rescinding the WCJ's order for a sanctions hearing and the appearance of the defendant's claims examiner. While acknowledging the duty to disclose evidence before a trial, the Board found no authority requiring pre-expedited hearing disclosure of sub rosa films, thus negating grounds for sanctions. The Board also determined an affidavit from the claims examiner would suffice, making her live appearance unnecessary. The order for the sub rosa films to be sent to the Agreed Medical Examiner was affirmed.

sub rosa filmsexpedited hearingsanctionsPetition for RemovalAgreed Medical Examinertemporary disability indemnitymedical treatmentclaims examineraffidavitLabor Code section 5813
References
Case No. ADJ4617752 (VNO 0390167), ADJ1668605 (VNO 0470519)
Regular
Nov 01, 2010

ROBERT SCHENCK vs. COLIN CLINTON, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, AFFORDABLE QUALITY MOVING & STORAGE, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves applicant Robert Schenck's petition for reconsideration of a workers' compensation award. Schenck argued the judge erred by admitting sub-rosa video evidence and by not finding total disability based on Dr. Lavi's opinion. The Board denied the petition, finding the sub-rosa evidence was properly admitted and that Dr. Lavi's opinion lacked substantial evidentiary support for total disability. The Board affirmed the WCJ's reliance on defense medical reports finding permanent disability of 29% after apportionment.

SubrogationSub rosa evidenceMandatory Settlement ConferencePermanent DisabilityApportionmentWorkers' Compensation JudgeReconsiderationSubstantial EvidenceQualified Medical ExaminerDoctor-shopping
References
Case No. ADJ387595 (VNO 0552648)
Regular
Jul 12, 2016

JOEL CARDENAS vs. ML ELECTRIC WORKS, INC, ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ZURICH NORTH AMERICA

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted the defendant's petition for removal, modifying a prior order by an administrative law judge. The Board removed the issues of penalty, costs, and sanctions related to the disclosure of sub rosa video and surveillance logs from trial consideration. However, the Board affirmed the remainder of the judge's order, which had compelled the defendant to serve the sub rosa materials and produce the claims adjuster and documents at trial. This decision aimed to prevent further discovery beyond the mandatory settlement conference cutoff while still requiring disclosure of the surveillance evidence.

Sub rosa videoPetition for RemovalMandatory Settlement ConferenceDiscovery cut-offDue processIrreparable harmClaims adjusterLabor Code section 5502(d)(3)PenaltySanctions
References
Case No. ADJ1646469 (VNO 0550706)
Regular
Apr 19, 2013

ANDREW HERNANDEZ vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA - CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case concerns the defendant's petition for reconsideration of an award for industrial injury to the applicant's low back and cervical spine. The defendant argued the applicant was not temporarily disabled as they offered a modified position consistent with AME Dr. Sew Hoy's restrictions, and that sub rosa videos should have been admitted. The Board denied reconsideration, finding Dr. Sew Hoy's report was qualified and did not preclude temporary disability, especially when contrasted with the applicant's treating physician's consistent findings. The Board also upheld the exclusion of the sub rosa videos due to late disclosure, as required by Labor Code section 5502(d)(3).

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardAndrew HernandezState Compensation Insurance FundFindings and Awardindustrial injurylow backcervical spinetemporary disabilitypermanent disabilityfuture medical treatment
References
Case No. MON 176608
Regular
Apr 23, 2007

MERCED F. POWER vs. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL

The applicant sought reconsideration of a workers' compensation award, arguing the administrative law judge erred by reducing permanent disability based on sub rosa films and by failing to rule on a motion for sanctions. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, affirming the original award but amending it to defer the sanctions issue. The case is returned to the trial level for further proceedings.

Petition for ReconsiderationFindings and Awardpermanent disabilitysub rosa filmsmotion for sanctionsWCJAppeals Boardindustrial injurycashierfood server
References
Case No. ADJ1283096 (LAO 0806679) ADJ1113634 (LAO 0881381) ADJ906561 (LAO 0850434) ADJ2972268 (LAO 0806680)
Regular
Nov 08, 2010

MARIA AGUIRRE vs. BEST FOODS BAKING COMPANY / CPC, TRAVELERS DIAMOND BAR

The Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior award, finding the medical evidence regarding apportionment of permanent disability was insufficient. The WCJ must develop the medical record regarding causation and apportionment, distinguishing between injury and disability. The Board also affirmed the exclusion of the sub rosa video as untimely obtained. The cases are returned to the trial level for further proceedings and a new decision.

ApportionmentChronic Pain SyndromeAgreed Medical ExaminerSub Rosa VideoCumulative TraumaSpecific InjuryVocational RehabilitationFindings and AwardReconsiderationDiscovery
References
Case No. ADJ924734 (MON 0299710)
Regular
Feb 07, 2014

VARDAN ESSAIAN vs. CAD FABULOUS, INC., STATE FARM CALIFORNIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration of an award of 100% permanent disability, finding the evidence did not justify an unapportioned award. The Board cited concerns regarding the apportionment of psychiatric disability and the impact of sub rosa video evidence on the applicant's claimed limitations. The case is remanded for further development of the record, specifically regarding the psychiatric AME's apportionment reasoning and the vocational experts' conclusions in light of the video evidence.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardReconsiderationAmended Findings of Fact and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentCumulative TraumaAgreed Medical ExaminerPsychiatryOrthopedicsSub Rosa Video
References
Showing 1-10 of 202 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational